Comparison of Measurement Methods for the Frequency Range 2–150 kHz (Supraharmonics) Based on the Present Standards Framework

Advances in power electronics, increasing share of renewables in the energy system and e-mobility cause an increase of disturbances in the frequency range 2–150 kHz, also known as supraharmonics. A rigorous, credible and agreed measurement framework is essential to evaluate electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) in this frequency range. While a normative method exists for measuring equipment emission in the laboratory, no normative method exists yet for the measurement of supraharmonic disturbance levels in the grid. The aim of this research is a detailed comparison of potential measurement methods derived from existing standards IEC 61000-4-7, IEC 61000-4-30, CISPR 16-1-1 and a critical assessment of their suitability for disturbance measurements in grid applications. Based on a comprehensive set of synthetic signals and real measurements from laboratory and field, this article studies the ability of the methods to assess the typical characteristics of supraharmonic emission with relevance to EMC coordination. It presents the benefits and drawbacks of the existing measurement methods and discusses the suitability of possible modifications for grid compliance assessment. The results and recommendations intend to be an input for the present activities of IEC SC 77A WG 9 to define a normative method for the measurement of supraharmonic disturbance levels to be included in the next edition of IEC 61000-4-30.

[1]  Jan Meyer,et al.  Survey of supraharmonic emission of household appliances , 2017 .

[2]  Paulo F. Ribeiro,et al.  On waveform distortion in the frequency range of 2 kHz–150 kHz—Review and research challenges , 2017 .

[3]  Matthias Klatt,et al.  Comparison of measurement methods for the frequency range of 2 kHz to 150 kHz , 2014, 2014 16th International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of Power (ICHQP).

[4]  A. Arrinda,et al.  A review on measurement techniques for non-intentional emissions above 2 kHz , 2016, 2016 IEEE International Energy Conference (ENERGYCON).

[5]  Schwarz White Paper.  Comparison of Time Domain Scans and Stepped Frequency Scans in EMI Test Receivers Products , 2014 .

[6]  Grevener Anne,et al.  Comparison of Measurement Methods for the Frequency Range 2 – 150 kHz (Supraharmonics) , 2018, 2018 IEEE 9th International Workshop on Applied Measurements for Power Systems (AMPS).

[7]  Jiri Drapela,et al.  Proposal of a Desynchronized Processing Technique for Assessing High-Frequency Distortion in Power Systems , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement.

[8]  Enrique Romero-Cadaval,et al.  Supraharmonics from power electronics converters , 2015, 2015 9th International Conference on Compatibility and Power Electronics (CPE).

[9]  Jan Meyer,et al.  A Digital Zero-Phase Filter for Measuring High Frequency Emissions (Supraharmonics) in Electrical Distribution Networks , 2018, 2018 Australasian Universities Power Engineering Conference (AUPEC).

[10]  Peter Schegner,et al.  Thermal Interactions in Modern Lighting Equipment due to Disturbances in the Frequency Range 2–150 kHz , 2019, 2019 IEEE Milan PowerTech.

[11]  Jan Meyer,et al.  Comparative analysis of the measurement methods for the supraharmonic range , 2020, International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems.

[12]  F. Krug,et al.  Signal processing strategies with the tdemi measurement system , 2003, Proceedings of the 20th IEEE Instrumentation Technology Conference (Cat. No.03CH37412).

[13]  Matthias Klatt,et al.  Filter for the measurement of supraharmonics in public low voltage networks , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC).

[14]  Anders Larsson.  High frequency distortion in power grids due to electronic equipment , 2006 .